20歲青年2016年涉替朋友接收來自巴西的包裹，惟他稱不知內有逾1公斤可卡因，他最終沒有收取包裹，事後與朋友被控一項企圖販毒罪，及後朋友獲控方撤控。青年原認罪，發現其律師團隊是由朋友兄長聘用後改為不認罪，受審後罪成被判囚23年。他早前提出上訴，上訴庭今（11日）裁定他上訴得直，批評控方放棄追究較重罪責的人，專注將無辜的人定罪，造成不公，下令推翻定罪和判刑並獲釋。
判辭指出，上訴人馬家健（案發時20歲）與其前同事洪志謙（音譯）原一同被控，但後來控方撤銷洪志謙的控罪。上訴人最初選擇認罪，但當案件轉介高院後，他解僱律師團隊並改為不認罪，原因是他發現其律師費由洪志謙支付，懷疑其律師在有利益衝突下唆擺他認罪，最終經審訊後他被裁定罪成。
上訴庭在判辭指稱，本案的情節特殊，主審法官陳慶偉曾在審訊時表示，案中的證據有很多疑點，而且證據顯示被告的律師團隊有將罪責推給上訴人之嫌，以換取洪志謙得以開脫，質疑控方應撤控，不過控方堅持繼續案件，堅稱決定獲刑事檢控專員允許。
上訴庭批評，控辯雙方的法律團隊均有問題，首先是上訴人原本的法律團隊差劣地建議他認罪；而控方又欣然接受上訴人認罪，因此放棄追究罪責較大的人，專注將一個可能是無辜的人定罪，導致不公義，亦反映檢控制度不理想。上訴庭又指出，是次上訴有更多問題仍未有答案，包括為何控方會撤銷洪志謙的控罪、檢控機關有否調查上訴人原律師團隊的行為等。
https://news.mingpao.com/ins/%E6%B8%AF%E8%81%9E/article/20210811/s00001/1628679268625/
青年涉企圖販毒判囚23年 今上訴得直獲釋 上訴庭狠批律政司專注將無辜者定罪 反映檢控制度不理想
極速神驅
290 回覆
475 Like
1 Dislike
高可晴呢
咁好明顯全部有勾結囉。
點賠?
主審話有問題但繼續判
陪審團判
香港司法只係國際笑話
無啦啦坐左成4，5年？
班官又好野，就咁鬧完律政司就算？
班官又好野，就咁鬧完律政司就算？
58. Regrettably, this appeal has raised more questions than it has been able to answer and, as we have said, there does not seem to have been any great enthusiasm to provide those answers. The questions which cry out for explanation are these:
(i) How was a person with convictions, inter alia, for rape, attempted rape, robbery, burglary, blackmail and escape from lawful custody able to secure employment as a clerk with a firm of solicitors;
(ii) How was a solicitor’s clerk with such a criminal record able to visit, let alone “advise”, a client in custody;
(iii) Why was the case against Hung Chi-him dropped and was any consideration ever properly given, or effort made, by the prosecution to calling the appellant to give evidence against him, either as an immunised or non-immunised witness;
(iv) Has there ever been any investigation by any prosecuting or professional authority into the conduct of the appellant’s previous firm of solicitors, including the said solicitor’s clerk;
(v) To whom in the Department of Justice was the case referred when the trial judge adjourned the matter on 11 April 2019, and were the trial judge’s concerns about the propriety of the continued prosecution properly and fully conveyed to an appropriate person of sufficient seniority in the Department?
59. These are serious questions which require to be answered if miscarriages of justice are to be averted in the future. We trust that they will be properly addressed by the authorities concerned.
(i) How was a person with convictions, inter alia, for rape, attempted rape, robbery, burglary, blackmail and escape from lawful custody able to secure employment as a clerk with a firm of solicitors;
(ii) How was a solicitor’s clerk with such a criminal record able to visit, let alone “advise”, a client in custody;
(iii) Why was the case against Hung Chi-him dropped and was any consideration ever properly given, or effort made, by the prosecution to calling the appellant to give evidence against him, either as an immunised or non-immunised witness;
(iv) Has there ever been any investigation by any prosecuting or professional authority into the conduct of the appellant’s previous firm of solicitors, including the said solicitor’s clerk;
(v) To whom in the Department of Justice was the case referred when the trial judge adjourned the matter on 11 April 2019, and were the trial judge’s concerns about the propriety of the continued prosecution properly and fully conveyed to an appropriate person of sufficient seniority in the Department?
59. These are serious questions which require to be answered if miscarriages of justice are to be averted in the future. We trust that they will be properly addressed by the authorities concerned.
陳慶偉
(i) (ii)好撚癲
洪志謙背後野唔細
揾我？
同我差唔多背景咁啦
（v) (vi) DOJ: Noted
1KG都23年
高可晴3KG乜事都無
高可晴3KG乜事都無